As soon as the gentlemen left narodniks move from empty, general phrases about "toiling peasantry"—phrases that have become tedious to everyone and reveal ignorance of neither the *Communist Manifesto* nor *Capital*—to precise data, the left-narodnik embellishment of the bourgeoisie is immediately exposed.

The bourgeois character of the entire theory of "toiling peasantry" is concealed by phrases and exclamations, but is exposed by facts and by the study of Marx's theory.

Here in No. 14 of *Stoyкая Mysl'* {30} a certain Mr. Batrak, writing in purely intellectual language, reasons about "socialism and the peasantry."

"Toiling farms are growing," declares Mr. Batrak, and he cites statistics from France and Germany. Statistics is such a thing that you cannot get away with mere phrases and exclamations here—deception is immediately laid bare.

In France, the area of land in "small farms"—that is, farms having from 5 to 10 hectares (a hectare is slightly less than a desyatina) of land—has grown.

Very good, Mr. Batrak! But have you not heard that the more intensive agriculture becomes, the more frequently hired labor is encountered in "small" (by quantity of land) farms? Does it not mean embellishing the bourgeoisie—to pass over in silence the data on hired labor? eh, Mr. Batrak?

Let us take German data. For 652,798 farms with 5–10 hectares there are 487,704 hired workers. What do you say? The vast majority of small farm owners exploit hired workers! And in France? In France, the cultivation of grapes—which requires hired labor on small plots of land—is far more widespread than in Germany.

The theory of "toiling farms" is a theory for deceiving workers by passing over in silence the data on hired labor.

Mr. Batrak takes Germany. "Small and medium" farms must count as "toiling" ones (a language without principles that can call anyone a "toiling" owner!). And so, Mr. Batrak deduces the growth of "toiling farms" from the growth of "small" and "medium" farms.

Look now at the data of this new defender of the bourgeoisie.

He begins with farms up to 2 hectares. Their number was in 1882—58.03%; in 1895—58.22%; in 1907—58.89%. Growth, is it not?

But as to the fact that this is growth in hired workers, our "left-narodnik" remained silent!!!

The statistics which he distorts speaks decisively: out of 3,378,509 farms up to 2 hectares (1907), only 474,915—that is, scarcely more than 1/10 (one-tenth)—are independent agriculturalists by their chief profession. The majority, however, are hired workers (1,822,792).

Out of 3,378,509 farms—2,920,119, that is, an enormous majority, are subsidiary farms where the principal income comes not from agriculture.

The question is raised: is this not embellishment of the bourgeoisie and capitalism when farm laborers, day workers, hired workers are passed off as "toiling farms"?!

Does not the silly little word "toiling owner" serve to gloss over the abyss between the proletariat (hired workers) and the bourgeoisie?? Does this little word not serve to smuggle in bourgeois theories??

Further. Farms from 2 to 5 hectares. Their number in 1882—18.6%; in 1895—18.29% and in 1907—17.57%. This is what Mr. Batrak writes.

And the conclusion? He is silent about the conclusion.

But the conclusion states: a decrease, not a growth. And precisely among these farms, only among them, there is no complete predominance of those hiring (purchasing private labor) and those hired out. Those hiring—411,311 (by number of hired workers); those hired out—104,251 (this is not yet all the number of those hired out, the statistics here are incomplete). Add them together—515 thousand, while altogether there are 1,006,277 such peasant farms, which means that even here the greater half either hire themselves out—or hire others!!

A fine little word: "toiling farm"—serves to deceive workers by concealing data on the buying and selling of labor power.

Further Mr. Batrak takes farms from 5 to 20 hectares and points out that they are growing.

And hired labor? Not a word, not a sound about this. The theoreticians of "toiling farms" have been sent by the bourgeoisie to conceal the data on hired labor.

Let us take these data. For 652,798 farms (1907) with 5–10 hectares—487,704 hired workers, which means more than half—are exploiters of hired labor.

For 412,741 farms with 10–20 hectares—711,867 hired workers, that is, all or nearly all are exploiters of hired labor.

How should one characterize a person who poses as a "socialist" while himself counting among the "toiling owners" the exploiters of hired labor?

The left narodniks, as Marxists have explained many times, are petty bourgeois who embellish the bourgeoisie and gloss over its exploitation of hired labor.

To the bourgeois theories of the left narodniks and Mr. Batrak in particular, we shall return later. But for now let us draw a brief summary.

The theory of "toiling farms" is a bourgeois deception of workers, based, among other things, on concealing data on the buying and selling of labor power.

Among the "small and medium" peasants, to whom the gentlemen left narodniks love to point indiscriminately, in reality the vast majority either sell or buy labor power, either hire themselves out or hire others. This essence is precisely what the bourgeois theory of "toiling farms" glosses over.

The proletarian says to the small peasant: you yourself are a semi-proletarian; go with the workers, there is no other salvation for you.

The bourgeois says to the small peasant: you yourself are an owner, a "toiling owner." "Toiling farms" are "growing" even under capitalism. Your work is that of an owner, not a proletarian.

Two souls dwell in the small farm owner: the proletarian soul and the "owner's" soul.

The left narodniks in practice repeat the teaching of the bourgeoisie, corrupting small peasants with "owner's" illusions. This is why Marxists wage a decisive struggle against this bourgeois corruption of small peasants (and backward workers) by the left narodniks.

*Put' Pravdy* No. 56, April 6, 1914

Printed according to the text of the newspaper *Put' Pravdy*